Comitologie[en] 

Treaty Article 202 (former 145) permits the Council to impose requirements within enabling legislation on the way the Commission exercises its executive power. The first comitology committees were established in 1962, when the Council recognised that it lacked the resources to make all the necessary implementation rules in the first agricultural market regimes. However, it did not want to delegate the implementation powers to the Commission without keeping some legislative control. The Council thus began to use implementation committees on an ad hoc basis when delegating executive duties to the Commission.

The Single European Act expanded Article 202 of the Treaty, mandating the Council to impose requirements within the enabling legislation on the Commission's use of its executive powers. In July 1987, the Council adopted what is known as the 'Comitology Decision,' defining specific committee variants and procedures for the exercise of the implementing powers conferred on the Commission. The 1987 procedures were replaced by a June 1999 Comitology Decision.

The three types of committees - advisory, management and regulatory committees - work according to different procedures and have varying levels of legislative control over the Commission. The type of committee assigned normally depends on the policy area being regulated:

• advisory committees: following draft measures by the Commission, the committee delivers its opinion within a certain time limit "if necessary by taking a vote" (simple majority). The Commission is to take the "utmost account of the opinion delivered" and inform the committee of the manner in which its opinion has been taken into account. This procedure is generally used when the policy matters considered are not very sensitive politically;
• management committees: where the measures adopted by the Commission are not consistent with the committee's opinion (delivered by qualified majority), the Commission must communicate them to the Council which, acting by a qualified majority, can take a different decision. This procedure is used in particular for measures relating to the management of the Common Agricultural Policy, fisheries and the main Community programmes;
• regulatory committees: the Commission can adopt implementing measures only if it obtains the approval of the committee (voting by qualified majority). In the absence of this approval, the proposed measure is referred back to the Council which takes a decision by qualified majority. However, if the Council does not take a decision, the Commission can adopt the measure provided that the Council does not object by a qualified majority. This procedure is used for measures relating to protection of the health or safety of persons, animals and plants and measures amending non-essential provisions of the basic legislative instruments.

The 1999 Comitology Decision allows the European Parliament to play a minor role in the comitology procedures. In cases where legislation comes under this procedure, Parlia ment can express its disapproval of measures proposed by the Commission or, where appropriate, by the Council, which, in Parliament's opinion, go beyond the implementing powers provided for in the legislation.

The Comitology Decision also enhanced the transparency of the committee system to the benefit of Parliament and the general public, making committee documents readily accessible to EU citizens. From 2000 onwards, the Commission has published an annual report giving a summary of committee activities during the previous year. From 2001, committee documents are recorded in a public register.

In the 2001 White Paper on European Governance, the Commission made the first appeal for reform of the comitology procedures. The Commission argued that the objective of refocusing the institutions as well as increasing efficiency justify reducing, if not eliminating, the use of existing management and regulatory procedures.  

In its  December 2002 Communication on Institutional Architecture , the Commission further argued that the upcoming phase of institutional reform (i.e., the Intergovernmental Conference scheduled for 2004) must ensure that the Commission's responsibility for European-level implementation of decisions taken by the legislator must clear and unambiguous for the people of Europe. Accordingly, it argues that the implementation committees that oversee the executive powers of the Commission should continue to exist but only as advisory committees. In order to allow the legislator to exercise democratic control over its action, the Commission must inform the European Parliament and the Council at the same time of the steps it is contemplating; the two institutions can give their opinion or, where appropriate, express their objections. The Commission then remains the body responsible for the decision on implementation measures in the strict sense, in contrast to the procedure set aside for legislative delegation. 

In the Report on European Governance published on 11 December, the Commission proposes to amend the 1999 Comitology Decision:

• revising the existing regulatory procedure, for implementing measures under enabling legislation adopted by co-decision, by introducing two distinct phases: an "executive phase" which is similar to advisory committee procedures; and a "control phase" where, the Commission's draft measures are considered by both the Parliament and Council;
• complementing the regulatory procedure with an "urgency procedure" allowing the Commission to adopt implementing measures before the legislators' controls take place.

This change in comitology procedures is intended to be transitional in nature, pending a new system of delegation of implementing powers based on the revision of the treaties.

The  Commission appears to seek to widen its decision-making role and its discretion in executive powers. The White Paper advocates that legislation by the Council and the Parliament should be restricted to essential features, while the particulars should be directed to the Commission. At the same time, it aims to limit the role of comitology, the Council's current instrument of control over Commission implementation.

The  Parliament has long complained about not being a participant in the comitology procedures. Having limited influence on the committee procedures, the Parliament wants to restrict the delegation of implementation measures to the Commission to purely routine measures. There are calls to ensure the role of the Parliament as co-legislator in procedures of legislative oversight.

Despite the efforts to enhance the transparency and openness of comitology procedures since 1999, many  academic and political commentators argue that comitology is a clear demonstration of an EU democratic deficit since decisions are referred to a small panel of people who are not directly elected.

The  UK Consumers' Association , holding the BEUC Presidency, has issued statements "deploring the secrecy" that surrounds the comitology process. It argues that the comitology procedures give extensive law-making powers to invisible and largely unaccountable committees made up of Commission officials and civil servants from Member States. They propose that the Commission conduct a separate review of comitology to ensure much greater transparency and accountability.

The  UK House of Lords' European Communities Committee have stated that "the case for greater transparency is overwhelming" and that the precise details of the remit of each committee, membership, agendas, rules of procedure and opinions should be published.